Traveling Blues

Earlier this year, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) announced that it had begun testing a new color-code method for screening passengers called Computer Assisted Passenger Prescreening System II (CAPPS II). In the new system, passengers buy and pay for their tickets as they always have, but they are asked for one additional piece of information: date of birth. This, along with the passenger's name, address, and telephone number, enables a third-party commercial database administrator to assess the probability that each passenger's real identity matches the one claimed when purchasing the ticket. Then, when ticketed passengers check in at the airport, the system, unbeknownst to them, assigns them a color to reflect their perceived risk level. Those marked "green" will proceed through security normally, subject to all routine procedures. Those marked "yellow," a category the TSA estimates will include approximately eight percent of the population, will be pulled aside for secondary security screening. Those marked "red," an estimated two to three percent of the traveling population, will be refused passage on any flight and immediately detained by law enforcement for interrogation.

The TSA says the new system is designed to reduce the amount of frustration airline passengers have experienced trying to get through security. It's a worthy goal; travelers have collected volumes of airport security horror stories over the past two years, perhaps none more than meeting planners. One Michigan-based planner reports putting her carry-on luggage into the X-ray machine and removing her shoes, just as everyone ahead of her had been asked to do by the TSA employees working that day. After walking through the metal detector, the woman (who asked to remain anonymous) says that the TSA agent then not only "inspected the soles of my feet" but also "even went so far as to remove a bandage from an open blister on one of my toes—how disgusting."

It's also, some might say, unnecessary and intrusive, especially when compared with other airport security checkpoints where travelers wearing athletic shoes are permitted to walk through the detector fully shod (and with their bandaged toes undisturbed).

With the threat of terrorist attacks not entirely diminished, few dispute the need for heightened caution around airplanes. And the continuing incidences of close calls, including July's particularly unsettling discovery at Orlando's International Airport of a handgun hidden inside a child's teddy bear, serve as dramatic reminders for the need for the strictest airline security.

But increasingly, planners -- who often travel by air several times per month -- say their airport experiences leave them feeling more frustrated than secure. Many complain that the inconsistency of security procedures from airport to airport makes it impossible to be prepared. Those who would like to save time (and possibly embarrassment) grumble they can never predict which shoes, jewelry, even underwear, will set off metal detectors. Still more worry that the long waits at and unpredictable nature of checkpoints will discourage attendees from traveling to meetings. And most daunting, planners say, is the future. Many fear that the TSA's plans -- now being tested -- to color-code passengers will severely impact the ways in which meetings are planned and how well they are attended.

Different Every Time

The most inconsistent security measure, planners report, is the screening of passenger shoes. "I traveled from Dallas Love Field to Corpus Christi, and in Dallas, they just wanded the bottom of my shoes and didn't make me take them off," reports Erika A. Bondy, senior event coordinator for the Dallas Convention Center. "But in Corpus Christi, they made me take off the same Teva sandals, and they put them through the machine." Bondy's conflicting experiences are not unique. "There is no consistency at airports," says Jo-Ann McKeon, a corporate meeting and event consultant who says she travels two to three times per week. "At one airport I was told to remove my shoes. At another, I was told it would be quicker if I removed my shoes [only] if I thought there was metal in them and 'they might beep.' At another, I was told, 'It's up to you, the TSA can't make you do anything.' " Corporate meeting planner Barbara McManus says she threw out a pair of shoes she used for traveling because they had steel shanks, and she wanted to avoid the hassle of removing her shoes at every airport. "But now they're asking us to take off our shoes regardless of type," she says. And women planners complain that some airports' metal detectors are so sensitive that they are activated by underwire bras.

Planners also complain they can't predict when they will need to have their identification handy. "My pet peeve is the inconsistency of checking your ID when presenting your boarding pass to the agent before getting on the plane," says trade show consultant Candy Adams, who has resorted to using her old convention badge holders to display her ID around her neck at all times. "Some airlines and airports still mandate it; some of them look at you like you're nuts."

Airports' policies also seem to differ in the handling of checked baggage. Marty Kruse, corporate event coordinator with Scottsdale, AZ-based Medicis Pharmaceutical, reports that his suitcase was opened and inspected while it was checked on both legs of his recent business trip, but that the airline left a note only on one of the two inspections. "When I left Phoenix, there was a note inside indicating that my bag had been inspected," he says. "However, on the return trip from Philadelphia, no note! But everything was clearly moved about and not just from normal shifting about. Zippered compartments were now unzipped."

For its part, the TSA says it's addressed inconsistencies that have arisen since the agency's creation two years ago and strives to apply its security measures uniformly across the country. According to the TSA, passengers are not required to remove their shoes prior to passing through the metal detector, but they are encouraged to do so to avoid further, more time-consuming "wanding." The TSA encourages women to avoid wearing metal jewelry and underwire bras on travel days. At presstime, the TSA was in the midst of introducing new guidelines concerning boarding passes and identification that would require passengers to have a boarding pass and photo to pass through security. And finally, according to TSA spokesman Mark Hatfield, passengers may lock checked bags with the understanding that if a locked bag triggers a security alarm, the lock will be cut to enable a hand search of the contents. Hatfield adds that it is TSA policy that screeners who open checked luggage are required to leave a note in the bag to indicate that it had been searched.

Hatfield also adds that what passengers may perceive as inconsistent procedures may actually reflect the "built-in random nature" of the airport security system, which is ultimately "part of its strength." After all, if you can't predict what will happen at the checkpoint, neither, presumably, can a would-be terrorist. Nevertheless, many planners consider that rationale small consolation in light of the proposed changes in passenger screening protocol looming on the horizon.

Protecting Privacy

The new system has outraged privacy advocates and prompted consumer boycotts of airlines rumored to have participated in excessive mining of passenger data. In September, JetBlue was sued by privacy rights groups for its participation in a government data-mining experiment similar to, but allegedly separate from, CAPPS II. For meeting planners, the concerns surpass those of privacy and go straight to the bottom line: Many fear the new screening system will hinder their ability to do their jobs.

Although the TSA's Hatfield also says that only violent felony fugitives -- those offenders who are currently running from the law -- will trigger a "red" code, some planners fear their speakers or high-profile executives will get stopped en route to meetings or events, causing a potentially disastrous no-show. "If [the detained person] has one phone call, it's probably not going to be to the person planning the meeting," says Washington D.C.-based meeting planner and consultant Joan Eisenstodt. Eisenstodt adds that the mystery surrounding exactly what types of data are being considered will also affect people's willingness to fly to events and meetings. "I don't think it's out of proportion at all to say that people will be very uncomfortable," she says. "People will think twice about going to meetings, especially if they don't travel a lot."

Eisenstodt and others are also concerned that the way in which they, and some of their attendees, purchase airline tickets may make them especially prone to "red," or at least "yellow," flags. "Immediately after 9/11, I was stopped every single time I flew," says McKeon. "I had one-way, last-minute, first-class tickets and fit the [suspicious] traveler profile. It was frustrating and embarrassing, not to mention counterproductive." And many question what a person's credit history has to do with airport security in the first place.

In response to these fears and criticisms, the TSA insists that the gathered information and its analysis will be purged after each transaction, and that the agency has sent up expedient remediation mechanisms through its ombudsman in case of erroneous information and flagging. And hotel lawyer Steven Rudner says it's too early to draw up new contracts including unable-to-fly contingency clauses. "It's legitimately a fascinating issue," he says, "because if a full three percent spread out evenly across the entire traveling public is denied flight, you'd better believe everyone will be having a big talk with the federal government. We have a constitutional right to travel."

But meeting planners, true to form, say it's better to be safe than sorry. "This is just one more aspect to build in," says Eisenstodt. "If something happens, you need to have a good PR plan for afterwards."